Lowell Sun Publishing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 9, 1964

147 N.L.R.B. 367 (N.L.R.B. 1964)

LOWELL SUN PUBLISHING' COMPANY
VII. DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE
367
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings and the entire record in
this case, the Board makes the following determination of dispute
pursuant to Section 10(k) of the Act: Employees engaged .as long-
shoremen, currently. represented by International Longshoremen's
and Warehousemen's Union and International Longshoremen's and
,Warehousemen's Union, Local Union No. 10, are entitled to perform
the work of operating Washington, or whirley, cranes utilized by
Howard Terminal when used in connection with cargo handling opera-
tions, where such work is assigned to longshoremen by the 1961-66
Pacific coast longshore agreement. between PMA and Respondents, as
it has been interpreted by the contracting parties or their arbitrators.
Lowell Sun Publishing Company and Lowell Typographical
Union No . 310, a Subordinate Local Union of International
Typographical Union , AFL-CIO,' Petitioner. Case No. 1-RC-
7747. June 9, 1964
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer John
R. Coleman. The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Chairman McCulloch and Members Leedom and Brown].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of certain employees of the Employer within the meaning of
Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Employer is engaged in publishing a daily newspaper in
Lowell, Massachusetts. The Petitioner is the recognized collective-
bargaining representative of the Employer's . composing room em-
ployees. The most recent contract between. the Petitioner and the
1 The petition and the formal papers are hereby amended to reflect the full name of the
Petitioner as it appears in its collective-bargaining agreements with the Employer.
147 NLRB No. 49.
368 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Employer expired on October 31, 1963 . The Newspaper Guild of
Greater Boston , Local 32, American Newspaper Guild , AFL-CIO,
hereafter called the Newspaper Guild , was certified on December 19,
1961 , as collective -bargaining representative in a unit of the Em-
ployer's nonmechanical employees , including proofroom employees.a
The Petitioner did not participate in the earlier proceeding or in the
election held pursuant thereto.
The Petitioner now seeks to represent a unit comprising , with the
usual exceptions , all composing room employees and proofreaders
and copyholders 3 In the alternative , the Petitioner requests a self-
determination election for a unit composed of all proofreaders and
copyholders . The Employer contends that the presently existing units
are appropriate and opposes the severance of the proofreaders and
copyholders from the certified unit. The Newspaper Guild did not
intervene in the proceeding and in a telegram received by the Board
dated March 4,'1964 , stated : "Newspaper Guild not contesting Typo-
graphical Union election petition for six proofreaders , Lowell Sun,
and will not appear at hearing."
The record indicates that the proofreaders and copyholders are sta-
tioned in an area of the mezzanine floor of the composing room. After
copy is approved in the editorial department , it is set into type by the
composing room employees . Printed proofs are then sent to the proof-
readers who check them for ,errors against the original copy. In the
performance of this duty , these employees often go into the.composing
room in order to notify the linotype operator if a wrong font was
utilized in the copy or if there were wrong cuts or other errors in
advertising proofs . In addition , the proofreaders have occasion to
discuss problems relating to the original .copy with the employees in
the editorial room. The copyholders work with the proofreaders and
frequently assist in reading proofs . They are in the normal line of
progression to the position of proofreader . Proofreaders and copy-
holders must possess knowledge of the different kinds of type and of
page layouts as well as of grammar and spelling . The working sched-
ule of the proofreaders and copyholders is fixed by the managing
editor after consultation with the composing room foreman so that
it should coincide with that of the . composing room employees rather
than with that of the nonmechanical unit employees. Unlike the
composing room employees, the proofreaders and copyholders receive
their paychecks from the managing editor, who is in charge of the
2 See Lowell Sun Publishing Company, 132 NLRB 1168, 1169 , footnote 9. The most
recent contract between the Newspaper Guild and the Employer covering the certified unit
expired on April 5, 1964.
3 The record indicates that the proofreaders and copyholders are the -proofroom,employees
who were included in the certified unit.
LOWELL SUN PUBLISHING COMPANY 369
editorial department. Although the proofreaders and copyholders
are under the general supervision of the managing editor, they are
immediately supervised by Madeline Lannon, who has more contact
and works more closely with the composing room personnel than with
the nonmechanical employees.
It is evident from the foregoing that the proofreaders and copy-
holders have duties, interests, and working conditions closely related
to those of employees in the composing room and that they are an in-
tegral part of the composing room operation. We therefore conclude
that they more appropriately belong in the composing room unit
represented by the Petitioner than in the nonmechanical unit repre-
sented by the Newspaper Guild 4 However, in view of the bargaining
history they may appropriately continue to be represented as part of
the certified nonmechanical unit represented by the Newspaper Guild.
In these circumstances, we shall make no final unit determination at
this time but shall afford the proofreaders and copyholders an oppor-
tunity to express their desires with respect to their choice of repre-
sentatives by granting them a self-determination election.'
In view of the foregoing, and upon the entire record, we shall direct
an election in the following voting group : All proofreaders and copy-
holders employed at the Employer's plant in Lowell, Massachusetts,
excluding office clerical employees, professional employees, all other
employees, guards, watchmen, and supervisors 6 as defined in the Act.
If a majority of the employees in the voting group vote for the Peti-
tioner, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to be included
in the unit now represented by the Petitioner, and the Regional Di-
rector conducting the election herein is instructed to issue a certifica-
tion of results to that effect. In the event a majority do not vote for
the Petitioner, these employees will be taken to have indicated their
desire to remain in the unit represented by the Newspaper Guild and
the Regional Director will issue a certification of results to that
effect.'
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
4 See William E. Locke, et at., co -partners d/b/a Dinuba Sentinel, and Sentinel Printing
Publishing Co., 137 NLRB 1610.
s As noted, this accords with the Petitioner's alternative request. No party seeks a
separate election among the presently represented composing room employees.
6 The parties stipulated that Madeline Lannon Is a supervisor. We shall therefore ex-
clude her from the unit.
7 Although the Newspaper Guild is not contesting the placement of the proofroom em-
ployees involved in this proceeding, it has as noted been certified to represent these em-
ployees and has bargained for them. In the circumstances we believe It Is appropriate to
adhere to customary procedure, which will permit the proofroom. employees to remain In
the certified unit in the event they reject the Petitioner. New England Container Com-
pany, 92 NLRB 1430.
766-236-68-vol . 147-25